UPDATE 1/28/10, 1:10pm PT:"Mandation Nation". Just flagging, for posterity, the three most noteworthy sideshow moments, as I had noted eacj in comments last night as they happened, since we now have the video of each, courtesy of Shannyn Moore's compilation (and AKMuckraker's "Mandation Nation"). Palin on Obama's "mandation for health care"; Matthews' racial forgetfullness; and Republican Justice Alito as the new Joe Wilson. All three videos now follow below...

Glenn Greenwald, a former Constitutional law and civil rights litigator, explains why Alito's remarkable violation of protocol, as seen in the clip below as he mouthed "that's not true" in response to Obama's criticism of the SCOTUS' recent activist legislation from the bench to allow unlimited corporate funds in American elections...

Chris Matthews thought Obama did so well last night, he completely forgot he was a black guy!...

Shannyn Moore describes the following post-SOTU interview with Hannity as "Palin’s word salad response to the President’s speech," and notes she "thinks she’s upset that [Obama] said he’s not a quitter…". Palin's "mandation" comment is just after the 5 min mark, and AKMuckraker helps us out by noting: "What’s 'mandation' you ask? According to Dictionary.com it means 'No dictionary results.' Strange."...

Obama stated that he hasn't raised taxes on one single American...Obama then spelled out the myriad of tax cuts he instituted...
And then Obama looked over to the GOP side as they sat on their hands stone faced and said;
"Gee I thought at least THAT would get an applause."
raucous laughter from the Dem side...

GOP sat still sat on their hands stone faced.

And the beat goes on...

Personally my reaction so far is...
Obama you've done a hell of a lot of talking. I won't be satisfied until I see some doing...nice speech...but I've heard it before.

If Obama and Holder had come out right after the innaugeration and indicted, prosecuted, convicted, and jailed/executed the 1000's of criminals in the Bush/Cheney administration, then he could have used the expression, "during the illegal and criminal Bush/Cheney years" whenever he wanted to talk about the lost jobs, lost economy, lost environment, lost surplus, lost lives, lost treasure, etc.

Instead, he wanted to "move forward" and "forgive and forget" and now he OWN the whole mess, lock, stock and barrel.

He could have had a nice "enemy" to point the idiots at, but now he IS the enemy.

Also, is it just me, or is this an unusually disjointed S.O.T.U. response from both sides of the aisle, even for these perennially disjointed Congressional Choads? Neither side feels unified in any of their responses. More like a revival, people shouting out and clapping solo...

For what it's worth, I believe they're supposed to be fully "impartial". Or at least appear as much.

Not even a twitch though. Not even a nod to 10% of the population that serves alongside...everyone else. They certainly managed to get up and clap vehemently when he vowed to protect military spending.

"I want a commission to make seniors eat cat food and by Mammon's bloated bowels I'm going to have my commission!"

Otherwise, a mixture of blah, reaganomics, a few lies to appease the base, more of his brand of "bipartisanship" that nobody but our corporate lords and masters thinks is a good idea... and a veto threat against anything that could remotely, be considered "liberal" spending.

Perhaps I should amend that to "we allow and assist other countries to violate them if it suits our purposes." Chomsky thinks the same.

And I guess Israel doesn't violate anything, since it never agrees to take part in any monitoring, or disclose anything about its nuclear programs or capacity. But do we not violate the NPT further when we provide them the financial capacity to do so? A very detailed history of Israel's nuclear capacity here.

And at April's Nuclear Security Summit, we will bring forty-four nations together behind a clear goal: securing all vulnerable nuclear materials around the world in four years, so that they never fall into the hands of terrorists.

These diplomatic efforts have also strengthened our hand in dealing with those nations that insist on violating international agreements in pursuit of these weapons. That is why North Korea now faces increased isolation, and stronger sanctions - sanctions that are being vigorously enforced. That is why the international community is more united, and the Islamic Republic of Iran is more isolated. And as Iran's leaders continue to ignore their obligations, there should be no doubt: they, too, will face growing consequences.

...is that Israel's nuclear capacity and refusal to join any international nuclear treaty, and our military support of them, strikes a more than hypocritical tone.

That's what I've always liked about you and the way you run your blog. Keepin' me and everyone else honest. Words do matter. In my defense, I was semi-rambling trying to keep a train of thought while listen to the President.

My disagreement with the chorus is that when I face someone doing something that looks evil, I try to ask myself the question: "realistically, given the situation that exists, and given the history leading to the situation, what else could they do?"

It makes it harder to find those evil folks, but in Solzhenitsyn's brilliant words:

If only there were evil people somewhere insidiously committing evil deeds, and it were necessary only to separate them from the rest of us and destroy them. But the line dividing good and evil cuts through the heart of every human being. And who is willing to destroy a piece of his own heart?

I thought it was a great speech, too. In fact, I think Obama may be the best political orator of my lifetime.

After the first year, though, I will believe him when I see what he does, not because he says the right things so well.

Soul Rebel, David L, Brad F, keep on criticizing Palin for her torture of the language. It was a brilliant, winning approach against W., and it doesn't make you look ridiculous at all. Americans everywhere said to themselves, "boy, that W is one dumb fella. I'm voting for Chomsky."

abe lincoln accused SCOTUS, in their Dred Scott ruling, of being wrong and being part of a conspiracy to expand slavery in his Cooper Union speech and House Divided speech during his pres campaign and senate campaign, respectively.

Please don't resort to what we all know recognize here as backwards-ass-math tactics to support your "Tea-tards are People, Too" argument. It makes your defense of Palin, and all folks who like to torture (not just language), wind and wheeze.

I have no idea what you're calling "backwards-ass-math tactics," but thank you for the reminder that W didn't win.

W got enough votes that he was able to be declared the winner and hold the oval office; whether illegal techniques got him over the top is another issue.

I'll bet that intellectuals calling him an idiot raised his vote totals. He was able to get himself into the oval office. Palin may be able to do that as well. Pointing out the obvious --- that she doesn't speak like an intellect --- is simply not helpful.

Isn't it obvious? I work for the RNC, the CIA, the NSA and the Zionist lobby. I've targeted Brad Blog as our biggest problem, and I need to disrupt things over here, so that Brad doesn't first become rich and then become President. It might not be possible to control him.

You're right, though, I guess I'm an elitist when I criticize the ineffectiveness of the left.

What's your brilliant winning approach to people in high places torturing the language? What's the appropriate response when people with power and in the public eye are making up words and continuing merrily along without missing a beat with the media acting like that's somehow normal, acceptable, or cute? Do people who make up words when they're discussing matters of national importance inspire you with confidence? Not me.

I ain't going along with the silent complicity. That's a ruinous path if ever there was one. Feel free to ignore(or admire) these brain shortcircuitings if that's your preference. But don't come crawling to me with an infected butt when a mandation bites you in the ass.

Norm Crosby and Doctor Irwin Corey I admire tremendously. They were creative, hilarious, and purposeful making up words. I wish they were here now to comment on these pretenders. George Bush and Sarah Palin are not aware of what they're doing. In oh so many ways. Nevertheless they are given huge credibility by virtue of their positions in society. Welcome to the monkeyhouse.

When was the last time that somebody convinced you of anything, or made you interested in talking with them, by ridiculing someone you thought was great?

For the left in this country to have any chance of accomplishing anything, it has to break out of its patterns. One of those patterns is acting superior to the electorate. It does not work.

If people cannot figure out what to think about Palin's intellect after watching her debate a respectable and respectful opponent, what will ridicule accomplish beyond momentarily making the person doing the ridiculing feel superior?

My "brilliant, winning" approach would be to offer them an alternative, not to point out that their's is dumb. Palin has built a record which points to her hypocrisy. Then she quit her state governorship to be a commentator on Fox. If that's not enough material for a respectful opponent to discredit her, then I have no idea what to do.

1. The way I talk to my sister, who's a big Sarah Palin fan, about Sarah Palin is very different from the way I write about Sarah Palin here amongst my many tribe members at BadBradDogs.

2. you ask--When was the last time that somebody convinced you of anything, or made you interested in talking with them, by ridiculing someone you thought was great?

For some reason I HAVE to consider arguments and criticism from whatever the source and no matter how presented. Even if it's someone whose opinions I have no respect for, don't personally like, and have known to be full of shit, if they say something I haven't thought of, considered, or know the answer to I HAVE to examine it. Cuz whatever your personal feelings you never know when someone might have some truth to offer. No matter how unappetizing the source or delivery.

That said, I agree that winning most people over by ridiculing is unlikely. But again, right at that moment I "mandationed" here, I wasn't trying to win anyone over to anything.

3. I guess I can see why you might think this but at the same time I'm not sure how making fun of Sarah Palin, here at BradBlog for making up a funny sounding word equals "acting superior to the electorate." From my point of view I do not feel superior to the electorate, whoever they are. I DO feel incredibly frustrated by the amount of ignorance passing for an informed citizenry we've got here in the U.S. Both sides and the middle of the aisle seem out to lunch to me. I hope I'm not spending a lot of time feeling superior. If this is what feeling superior feels like I'd be happy to trade it in. I think this is more like what frustrated and freaked out feels like. Also, we spend a lot of time here in often heated discussion about how to connect the disparate electoral dots.

4. So, as far as feeling superior, I think you're assigning feelings to someone you don't know, that do not match that someone's reality. From my emotional/psychological vantage point I'm not feeling superior. I'm feeling terrified at what passes for meaningful political discourse in this country. It completely freaks me out that Sarah Palin and Sean Hannity and Chris Matthews are broadcast into millions of homes.

5. Lecturing me on the need to offer alternatives is a bit infuriating as I have spent and am spending a good deal of my time working on that very thing and faithfully trying out new approaches whether it's with my neocon sister and brother-in-law, my progressive congressman Barney Frank, or my liberal friends. Nobody seems to want to listen to much of anything that's too at odds with their worldview. They do not seem to be operating from the must-consider-all-versions-of-reality-method of inquiry that I am predisposed to. All of this presents a most challenging situation.

So please allow me a bit o' the ol' mandation as a little relief when some hilariously and unexpectedly appears on the horizon.

7. MOST IMPORTANT OF ALL---- in my previous post I wrote DOCTOR Irwin Corey which is incorrect. That brilliant man was known as Professor Irwin Corey. I am horrifed at myself. I ridicule myself. I feel superior to myself.

I understand that what people say on Brad Blog and places like it is not the same as what they would say if in the room with a Palin supporter. My concern is more general.

I apologize if I'm coming off as lecturing. I apologize for assigning feelings to someone I don't know. My opinions on this are strong, and are based on trying to work with others on the left for much of my life, between periods when I've simply been too disgusted. It could just be me and the ease with which I get disgusted.

I think most people with so-called mainstream politics in this country are basically disciplined by finding out what works and what doesn't. A lot of folks on the left, having never, NEVER, in their entire lives been anywhere near power, have (IMO) very unrealistic notions.

Idealism is fine --- I think of myself as an idealist. But, and I'm not referring to you here, announcing grand plans and requirements which might be great except for the unfortunate fact that you have no idea of how to get the votes for them from anywhere except perhaps a college campus, then following that up with contempt for the electorate, the "Teatards," and so on, is not idealism. It's just dumb. And anti-democratic. And pointless.

It's hard to type through the tears. Zinn lived a few blocks away from where I am now. He and Roslyn used to walk by now and again. Sometimes I'd get to talk to them. Saw him a month ago in the post office. Went in and shook his hand again. Told him again I was a long time fan. Started to say something about his inspiration and that I ws trying to follow in his footsteps. That seemed a little presumptuous and inaccurate so I changed it to something about a parallel path. He gave me that mischievous and incredibly warm Howard Zinn smile that went right to your heart and said,"Parallel is good."

I'm heartbroken.

I went and clicked on your link cuz I didn't know what you meant and started bawling.

You're right. My use of 'Teatards' was completely insensitive and inappropriate. I'd like to apologize to any retards that might've been offended.

Sorry, MINORITY of the electorate! I'm sorry Mitch sees you as so uber-weenified that he has to beat me up for my random, fallable, and yes, admittedly juvenile sense of humor, in a forum that, unless linked to by a neo-snot, you are unlikely to read, but if you did, I'm sure you wouldn't hold back.

And finally, I'm really, really sorry some folks feel I'm far, far too clever and condescending for you to follow the complex things I say and write, here. Especially since I admit to being a clown, just like teatard favorite Glen Beck, with very little practical use other than coming up with (what used to be) clever things to say. How very passe of me. How retro-90's...

My bad, teapeople - I guess giving you the benefit of the doubt for independent thought is only okay when it serves my humorless argument...

Have now updated the main item with the videos of Matthews, Alito and Palin's "Mandation Nation" (with a thanks to Soul Rebel for making the links to Shannon and Jeanne easy to find this morning, after I'd tweeted the "mandation" to both of 'em last night.)

Mitch said:

Soul Rebel, David L, Brad F, keep on criticizing Palin for her torture of the language. It was a brilliant, winning approach against W., and it doesn't make you look ridiculous at all.

If you don't find it amusing that she said "mandation of health care", well, I don't know what to say. If you think that everything I say or do here has some political/activist reason, you'd be incorrect. Though it's worth noting that the wingnuts have no problem using language gaffes effectively --- even dishonestly (by using stuff they didn't actually say) --- to help sink their opponents (see: Gore "invented the Internet", Kerry "was for it, before against it", Clinton: "the definition of is is", Obama "57 states", etc.)

Finally, not sure if it was this thread, or a different one today, but you referred to the "chorus" here, or some such. If you haven't notice, I'd suggest it's because you're not looking closely enough since getting miffed over the recent Israel thread, but there is no "chorus" here. There may be many outspoken folks who have disagreed with you recently, but there are others who have either backed you up, taken a different position from all of the above, or otherwise haven't spoken up in comments who don't agree with any particular "majority appearing" segment of our commenters.

Criticize all you like, as I always enjoy your points of view, but don't make the mistake of falling for the very Us/Them mentality, I'm sure you decry.

Oh...and one more thing. There is little evidence that Bush "got enough votes" for anything in 2004. He could have lost across the nation 75% to 25% for all we know. If nobody bothers to count the votes, there's no way to know.

For the record, just because I don't use emoticons to soften my jabs doesn't mean my teasing isn't well intended. My above comment seems particularly...sharp. Happy to scream from the rooftops that I adore the mind of Mitch T., even when we can't agree on squat. In fact sometimes more.

That said, I really am getting tired of being told here that asserting and defending banal, 7th grade civic class facts we used to all be able to agree on is somehow "elitist" and "offensive".
C'mon now.

I never shared in the hype of the Obama Hope, having had my brains dashed by the last Democratic President Rahm ruined, but I did feel some relief at what I thought would be an age in which intellect was cool, again.

But, no...the Teatards have ruined that, too.

(For the record, I'd like to just point out that I began using "Teapeople" here a while back when it was suggested to me that "Teabaggers" was no longer appropriate - even though that is what they called themselves until they figured out why they shouldn't. I have since reverted back to "teatards" just to be childish. Also because the basic respect I had assumed would be forthcoming from the very people I was trying to appease, wasn't.)

"Back-asswards math" = math that never was possible used to justify talking points that don't square with reality.

Can be effective even when used dripping wet with sarcasm (nice work!) i.e. 'Americans everywhere said to themselves, boy, that W is one dumb fella. I'm voting for Chomsky.'implying that they 'voted for Bush' because of the reasons you suggest.

I spent my college years in Boston. When I wandered to Click'n'Clack's Hahvad Yad, I used to think all the cards with Reagan or Nancy photos and snide captions were hysterical. Then, one day, I was teaching in Huntsville, Alabama --- short of Oklahoma City, the most depressing place I've been to in the United States. Sure enough, there were the "Christian" bookstores with the exact same cards, except the photos were of Clinton and Hilary.

After more fighting with family and friends over the last couple of days, it's sure comforting to bop in for a minute and read a few from my old favorites here. I feel like you are my girlfriends, companions, river riders.

Hope I don't start getting too needy.

Howard Zinn is gone.

I clicked on Soul Rebel's link, I yelled NO, and started wailing. I love Howard Zinn. I loved Roslyn too. She was so sweet and really beautiful. Another mark of his genius that he spent his life with her. She made me feel so recognized and appreciated when I'd run into them on the street. She really looked at you. He changed my life. They were adorable. So I did the smart thing. I adored them.

My Dear Lasagna ~ I cried, too. FWiW, I don't feel as sad about it when I think about the enormous body of work he achieved in the long (but still too short)amazing life he spent, here. What a densely-packed, overly-fruitful thicket of perspective and timeless contribution.

I didn't know anything about Zinn until I started teaching HS about 11 years ago. Although I had been protesting war, from Iraq to Somalia to Kosovo to Sudan, since I was a sophomore in college when Bush 41 first cemented our presence in the cradle of civilization, somehow Zinn's work eluded me. I knew Chomsky, not well at the time, but I knew who he was and what he was about and had read a few short pieces. But my activism over my college years was not well-directed, and often amounted to simply being pissed off at "the man" because...well, I'll let the imagination wander.

I was introduced to A People's History by my colleague who taught AP US History and used it as a primary text.

That book changed my understanding of what it meant to be a US citizen. I am forever in Zinn's debt, and it will be one of my deepest regrets that I never got to meet the man. I go to many political "events" (just met David Swanson, and bought his brilliant book Daybreak) and make it a point to shake the hands, get the signatures and the photo-ops for posterity (me & you one day Brad). I'm rarely starstruck (well, Randi IS a goddess), but Zinn was one of the few that I would imagine myself speechless in front of. I was like that the first time I met Michael Moore (yeah, you can laugh at that if you want, but he is my generation's Tom Paine, Paul Revere, and Patrick Henry all rolled into one (no fat jokes please) and he is a true American.) I just kind of stammered and said a shaky "Thank You so much for everything." I was much more composed the second time around.

But that's what meeting Zinn would have been for me. How does Thank You even cover an iota of gratitude that I feel for this man's body of work, and awe for the personal suffering he endured to bring it to me? But he would have known it was enough, a simple and shaky Thankk You, wouldn't he - and that was his connection...he would know (he KNEW) because he was so truly and really one of us.

He was an authority on what it means to be true and good and real and honest and compassionate and worldy.

"No flag is large enough to cover the shame of killing innocent people."

Dear JD and SR @ 75&76
You've both got me crying again. So very good to cry.

I'm not sure how long ago it was that I first met Zinn. Maybe 15 years? I was living up in Hanover NH, had been introduced to Zinn's work, had my mind blown, repeatedly(though I certainly think I was predisposed to find my path, A People's History was instrumental in giving me a big push onto it), and so was thrilled to discover he was giving a lecture at Dartmouth.

The lecture hall was packed. He was just as I'd imagined he would be. Very smart, but also so funny and human. I felt like I knew him. Felt so warm towards him.

So during the question and answer period I took a chance cuz I thought he'd dig it and I wanted to play.

Called upon, I talked about how I'd been introduced to his work and how illuminating and inspiring it was. Not only did he explain events that made so much more sense of the world, he offered alternative approaches, solutions.

I said that in my excitement to share all this with others I'd go up to people and ask,"Do you know Howard Zinn?", but that invariably they'd think I was saying,"Howard's End?" the movie.(which was big at the time)

I paused.

Zinn looks up at me way up in the audience on the left hand side and asks,"So is that your question?"

I said, "Well, yeah, I was kinda wondering if you ever ran into that problem. You know, people confusing your name with that movie."

The auditorium was still 3/4 full and there was some laughter. Then Zinn launched into this story about going to the Harvard Square cinema with his wife. As they were approaching the ticket window, the ticket seller said,"Howard Zinn?" Howard said he assumed it was one of his former students from BU cuz they often ended up having quite successful careers selling tickets in movie theaters and working concession stands. But no it wasn't a former student. The ticket guy was asking him if he wanted tickets to see "Howard's End".

Everybody laughed. He took my joke question(which also was real as that had happened to me) and brought it round full circle. Perfect.

When I went up afterwards to shake his hand and say hi he said something like,"Don't I know you?" cuz he felt like he already did. You can imagine my joy. I think we were both right--we did know each other.

Geeze, now writing this I realize that sometimes life really is sweet. And extraordinary. I'm doubly glad I told that.